My first aired-on-TV photo! (Rights given as part of package)

[paul -]

I have been doing aerial photography, and giving

advertising/reproduction/usage rights to my customers as part of the

package, all at a lower cost than any area competition's single

print price. Also, customers give me permission to use the photos

in my own advertising, display my work in their businesses, and

provide a place for my business cards.<p>Moments ago, I saw one of

my aerial photos in a TV commercial for the first time! Yeah, baby!

<p>When I am done with a job, I like to put it behind me, which is

most easily done by giving the customer non-exclusive usage rights

along with TIFFs of their photos. I am comfortable with this

arrangement, but does anyone think I am hurting myself in the long

run?

[gary evans]

Not so long as you are being paid well enough for the lost future income stream.

 

I am a firm believer in lowering price structure to break in to the business, but if you are offering unlimited rights for less than your competition is getting for prints, sounds like you are losing a bundle.

 

Maybe keep your stress-free existence by giving away the rights, but make sure you are compensated for everything your client will likely use the rights for! Assume that a commercial client might use one of your photos for a large print ad or TV commercials and that a private client would have ordered a couple of enlargements and price accordingly.

 

Keep in mind though that anti-selection will mean that those who are not looking to use your photos so much will probably balk at your new price structure and go to another photographer who is willing to be more flexible and that there will be other clients who will jump all over your price because they are planning to use your photos in a much more complete fashion. Either way, you could lose money.

 

As any basic economics class will tell you, best to customize your prices to the max that each client is willing to pay. Only trouble is finding that max!

 

Good luck!

[ellis_vener_photography]

<I>lso, customers give me permission to use the photos in my own advertising</I>Wow,

they give you permission to exercise a right you automatically have.<P>Do you retain the

rights to sell the photos, or similars, to other potential clients as well? That can be worth

real money down the line, especially for aerial photography.<P>It will be interesting to see

how you feel when something you shot for very little money gets used in a really big

campaign where $100,000s are spent -- but not on you.

[paul -]

Gary, my costs are kept down due to the fact that I don't have to pay for flight time (lucky me!), for reasons I won't go into. I'm sure that flight-associated costs are the primary reason why the others <i>need</i> to charge more. If a customer would rather pay someone else more for a single print because they don't want/need usage rights that I give with my less expensive prints, it's their money. For now, I'm making easy money doing something I love, and I even feel a little guilty charging as much as I do. (Although I'm sure that will pass.)<p>Ellis, don't I still need the property owner's permission to distribute photos of their property in advertising mailings, or online etc? But yes, I see your point about not getting a cut of the bigger pie down the road. Perhaps I should limit the usage rights in some way.<p>Thanks for your insights, I appreciate others' points of view!

[qtluong]

The cost involved in producing an image is much less relevant to pricing than the rights granted. In theory, you could license each image that you make for only slightly more than what it cost you to produce and still be ahead. In practice, you can license only a tiny fraction of the images you produce, so those images have to be made to pay as much as possible, which means not giving away rights (especially in your own initiative). Just giving unlimited rights to "put this behind you" doesn't make any sense. The only case you would

want to do that is if the client requests it, and you should then

charge them accordingly.

You are definitively hurting yourself in the long run. <a href = "http://www.terragalleria.com/stock-photography.html">Terra Galleria stock photography</a>

[qtluong]

I will also add that while it is a great feeling to see your images

on TV, it is a much greater feeling to see your images on TV AND know

that they recognized the value of your images by paying you appropriately.

<a href = "http://www.terragalleria.com/stock-photography.html">

Terra Galleria stock photo</a>

[enlightened-images]

I agree w/ QTL - I was much happier seeing the $1K check for a 3 second use on a regional TV commercial than I was seeing the commercial.<br>

<br>

Gary Crabbe<br>

<a href="http://www.enlightphoto.com">Enlightened Images</a>